Nations have no permanent friends and enemies, they have only permanent interests.

Introduction

In 1848 the British statesman Lord Palmerston told the House of Commons: "We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow." His words became a classic statement of political realism. The history of international relations largely confirms that states change partners as their interests change. Yet some relationships endure beyond immediate interests, because interests themselves are shaped by geography, identity and values.

Realist foundations

Realists such as Hans Morgenthau argue that states act to secure power and survival in an anarchic system. Alliances are instruments, not commitments of the heart; when the balance of power shifts, alliances shift too.

Evidence from history

The United States and the Soviet Union were allies against Nazi Germany and became rivals soon after 1945. China and the United States, enemies in the Korean War, opened relations in 1971–72 — facilitated by Pakistan — to balance the Soviet Union. France and Germany, which fought three wars between 1870 and 1945, became the core partners of European integration. The Abraham Accords (2020) normalised relations between Israel and several Arab states, and Saudi Arabia and Iran restored relations in 2023 through Chinese mediation. Each shift followed changing interests.

Pakistan's experience

Pakistan's relationship with the United States has swung between close alliance — SEATO and CENTO in the 1950s, the Afghan war in the 1980s and the war on terror after 2001 — and sanctions and estrangement, as under the Pressler Amendment in the 1990s. Relations with Russia, once hostile during the Cold War, have warmed in energy and defence cooperation. Meanwhile, India and Russia remain partners while India builds a strategic partnership with the US. Pakistan has learnt that great-power friendships are conditional.

Counter-argument: enduring friendships

Yet some relationships seem permanent. Pakistan and China describe their friendship as "all-weather", having remained close through decades of change. The Anglo-American "special relationship" rests on shared language, history and values. Pakistan's relations with Saudi Arabia and Türkiye draw on religious and cultural bonds and popular affection. Alliances among democracies, such as NATO, are reinforced by shared values. These examples show that friendships can endure when interests are consistently aligned and reinforced by identity and trust.

Synthesis

The maxim is broadly true, but incomplete. Interests are not purely material; they include identity, ideology and reputation. Long-standing friendships endure precisely because they serve deep and lasting interests — Pakistan–China ties rest on shared strategic concerns about India and on economic interdependence. When interests diverge sharply, even old friendships cool. Statesmen must therefore build relationships on durable interests while nurturing trust and shared values.

Lessons for Pakistan

(i) Define national interests clearly — security, economic development and regional stability — and pursue them consistently; (ii) avoid excessive dependence on any single power; (iii) diversify partnerships with China, the US, the Gulf, Europe, Russia and Central Asia; (iv) build relationships on trade and investment, which create lasting mutual interests; (v) remain open to improved relations even with adversaries when interests allow; and (vi) remember that a strong economy and internal stability make a country a valued partner.

Conclusion

Palmerston's maxim captures the logic of international politics: friendships and enmities follow interests. History is full of former enemies turned partners and allies turned rivals. Yet relationships rooted in lasting interests, shared values and trust can endure. The wise nation pursues its interests without illusions, while investing in friendships that make those interests easier to secure.